گفت‌وگوی ادیان و مساله «دیگریِ دینی» در الهیات ناظر به ادیان

بنابر باور غالب، شکل گیری و ثمر بخشی گفت وگوی ادیان بیش از هر چیز مبتنی بر گشودگی نسبت به دین دیگر و به رسمیت شناختن دیگریِ دینی است، به گونه ای که باید پذیرفت دین دیگر هم واجد بهره و نصیبی از حقیقت است و متدینان به آن نیز که اینک طرف گفت وگو قرار گرفته اند واجد حظی از نجات و رستگاری هستند. اما پرسش مهم این است که بر پایه کدام بستر الهیاتی می توان تکثر دینی را ارج نهاد و چنین سهمی از حقیقت و نجات را برای دیگر ادیان در نظر گرفت؟ امروزه واکاوی ابعاد این مساله و جستجو برای یافتن بهترین پاسخ به آن در الهیات ناظر به ادیان، پی گیری می شود. سه رویکرد انحصارگرایی، شمول گرایی و کثرت گرایی که هر یک متضمن تفسیر الهیاتی ویژه ای نسبت به دیگر ادیان است، الگوهایی هستند که با گذشت زمان در دل الهیات ناظر به ادیان شکل گرفته اند و بخت و اقبال خود را در سامان دادن پاسخی به مسئله دیگریِ دینی آزموده اند. این مقاله در صدد است تا پاسخ های فوق را مورد ارزیابی قرار دهد. پژوهش حاضر از روش تحقیق کیفی بهره می گیرد و بر این پیش فرض استوار است که الگوهای کلاسیک الهیات ناظر به ادیان، از شکل دادن بستر الهیاتی مناسبی برای گفت وگوی ادیان به گونه ای که دیگریِ دینی را به رسمیت بشناسد و هم زمان التزام و هویت دینی مشارکان در گفت وگوی ادیان را پاس دارد، قاصر است

Interreligious Dialogue and the Problem of

Interreligious dialogue has never been the subject of extensive debate as it is today. It looks like human has never experienced the importance of being different as profoundly and tangibly when facing with the everyday concept of quot othernessquot as he does these days. It leaves no wonder why the interreligious dialogue has become an inevitable task in the present era. The formation and then the fruitfulness of interreligious dialogue are based more than everything else on the recognition of the quot religious other. Dialogue entails devoting certain space for others and admitting others and when it comes to interreligious dialogue it requires providing special space for other religions and their adherents. The nature of religion, however, presupposes obligation and negation that is: obligation toward the religious doctrines and negation of other religions. Thus, considering this fact, is it possible for religions to admit quot religious otherquot and welcome the interreligious dialogue? The present study is based on this assumption that the contrast between interreligious dialogue and quot religious otherquot from the viewpoint of theology is the result of theological interpretation that the followers of a religion would have of other religions. The three approaches of exclusivism, inclusivism and pluralism, each of which requires specific theological interpretation toward other religions, make up the paradigms that have been formed within the theology of religions over time and have done their best to solve the problem of quot religious otherquot In this paper, at first the value judgment of the three paradigms referring to the theology of religions with regard to religious diversity will be analyzed, then using the Baumann's theory of quot Grammars of Identity / Alterity quot we will try to elaborate on the relationship between the interreligious dialogue and the problem of quot religious otherquot from the perspective of the three mentioned theological patterns. Based on the findings of the study each of the exclusive, inclusive and pluralistic interpretation of theology offers a different explanation of the terms quot selfquot and quot otherquot and seeks a specific tie with the notion quot religious otherquot . Accordingly, there is a meaningful relationship between interreligious dialogue and the way the quot religious otherquot is interpreted. The more Christian theology indicates acceptance of quot religious otherquot the more probable it will be to hold the interreligious dialogue. In addition to increasing the level of religion's tolerance toward quot religious otherquot , and would drive the interreligious dialogue toward a more real one, this quality would turn the religious identity from static and selfsufficiency phenomenon to a more dynamic and pluralistic one.